From: Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 19:26:39 +0000 (+0000)
Subject: New post.
X-Git-Url: https://pere.pagekite.me/gitweb/homepage.git/commitdiff_plain/e1158e73a3736752c5156d6520d9f473d135ae87?ds=sidebyside

New post.
---

diff --git a/blog/data/2012-04-19-rand.txt b/blog/data/2012-04-19-rand.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..6be1d3d840
--- /dev/null
+++ b/blog/data/2012-04-19-rand.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+Title: RAND terms - non-reasonable and discriminatory
+Tags: english, nuug, standard, video, multimedia
+Date: 2012-04-19 23:00
+
+<p>Here in Norway, the
+<a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fad.html?id=339"> Ministry of
+Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs</a> have created
+a <a href="http://standard.difi.no/forvaltningsstandarder">directory of
+standards</a> that are recommended or mandatory for use in the
+government.  When the directory was first published, the people behind
+it made an effort to ensure that everyone would be able to implement
+the standards and compete on equal terms to supply software and
+solutions to the government.</p>
+
+<p>But recently, some standards with RAND
+(<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing">Reasonable
+And Non-Discriminatory</a>) terms have made their way into the
+directory.  And while this might not sound too bad, the fact is that
+standard specifications with RAND terms often block free software from
+implementing them.  The reasonable part of RAND mean that the cost per
+user/unit is low,and the non-discriminatory part mean that everyone
+willing to pay will get a license.  Both sound great in theory.  In
+practice, to get such license one need to be able to count ones users,
+and be able to pay a small amount of money per unit or user.  By
+definition, users of free software do not need to register their use.
+So counting users or units is not possible.  And given that people
+will use the software without handing any money to the author, it is
+not really economically possible for a free software author to pay a
+small amount of money to license the rights to implement a standard.
+The result is that free software are locked out of standards with RAND
+terms.</p>
+
+<p>Because of this, when I see someone claiming the terms of a
+standard is Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory, all I can think of is
+how this really is non-reasonable and discriminatory.  Because free
+software developers are working in a global marked, it does not really
+help to know that software patents are not supposed to be enforceable
+in Norway.  The patent regimes in other countries affect us even here.
+I really hope the people behind the standard directory will pay more
+attention to these issues in the future.</p>
+
+<p>You can find more on the issues with RAND, FRAND and RAND-Z terms
+from Simon Phipps
+(<a href="http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2010/11/rand-not-so-reasonable/">RAND:
+Not So Reasonable?</a>).</p>